Jitendra Nath Mondal v. The State Of West Bengal And ORS.

26th February, 2026 (D/L No.14) Ct. No.4 (SKB) W.P.S.T.162 of 2024 Jitendra Nath Mondal

Versus

The State of West Bengal and others Mr. Rabin Gorain, Ms. Ananya Neogi, Ms. Anushka Ghosh ... for the petitioner.

Mr. Rajarshi Basu, Mr. K. M. Hossain ... for the State.

1. Heard learned advocate for the writ petitioner.

2. The writ petition has been filed after having moved before the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal (in short 'Tribunal') in O.A.732 of 2023.

3. The petitioner claims that he retired in 2014 and there are some dues relating to his service period on account of official expenses incurred by him, personally. He approached the Tribunal in this regard by filing an Original Application bearing O.A. No.1163 of 2016. The Tribunal passed an order dated 20.02.2019 in the said original application directing the respondent no.3 to consider the petitioner's claims by passing a reasoned order, after giving an

opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, subject to the claims being in relation to dues which are not the subject matter of the disciplinary proceeding.

4. The petitioner submitted his representation claiming dues and was afforded an opportunity of hearing as per the order passed by the Tribunal in O.A.1161 of 2016. However, the exercise did not bear any fruit. Rather than moving before the Tribunal for enforcement of the Tribunal's earlier order dated 20.02.2019, in O.A. 1161 of 2016, the writ petitioner filed a successive application for the same relief. The same was registered as O.A. No.732 of 2023.

5. We are unable to understand why the petitioner filed a successive O.A. for the selfsame relief having obtained an order in the earlier original application.

6. In the second O.A., the Tribunal again passed an order on 06.05.2024 directing that the petitioner should resubmit the bills in proper order and if such bills are resubmitted in proper order, the Divisional Forest Officer, Birbhum was directed to dispose of the same as per rules within a specified time. This order is put to challenge in the present writ proceeding.

7. We fail to understand why the petitioner having obtained a successive direction from Tribunal for consideration of his claim, has now moved the present writ petition before this court, but did not challenge the Tribunal's order dated 06.05.2024 passed in O.A. No.732 of 2023.

8. Even assuming that the authorities did not comply the Tribunal's order, then also the petitioner shall have to invoke appropriate remedy for enforcement/compliance of the Tribunal's order in an appropriate proceeding.

9. The present writ petition is, therefore, misconceived and is dismissed, but reserving the petitioner's liberty to pursue appropriate remedy.

(Madhuresh Prasad, J.) (Prasenjit Biswas, J.)